Dr. Jennifer Schweppe:

Deputy Martin Kenny has asked for a lot in his questions. With respect to the incitement provisions, we need to be very cautious when we carve out an exception to freedom of expression. We know that there are some issues with the application and implementation of the 1989 Act and it needs some work. Perhaps amending the existing Act is better than repealing and replacing it with this inherently inconsistent legislation.

With respect to the Good Friday Agreement, it is of course the case that in Northern Ireland there are no aggravated offences. On one argument we have much stronger protections and much stronger legislation here, having aggravated offences, because in Northern Ireland it is simply an aggravated sentencing provision. There is nothing to stop us having a similarly broad aggravated sentencing provision. We can do that. That will not go on the criminal record of the individual. That will not affect their future employment history. What is presented in the legislation is a dual model. So what we would say is have a narrow model used in the aggravated offence and then have a much broader model in the sentencing provision, which can be exactly the same as Northern Ireland if that is what legislators want and that is certainly a commendable approach to take.

In response to Deputy Carroll MacNeill, what is really dangerous and the Law Commission cautioned this with respect to introducing legislation, is that if one has a broad framework it is incredibly damaging to reduce that framework, to contract it and remove protections. What we would advocate is to build on what the Law Commission says. Introduce a narrow model, particularly with the offences, then build it after five years if there are insufficient convictions. If one feels that the court has interpreted the motivation requirement too narrowly, and we do not know how they are going to interpret it, then review it after five years. One cannot introduce broad legislation and then say that it is too broad, and say that all those things that we called hate crimes before we actually do not think they are and we are going to narrow it. As the Law Commission said, that sends a very damaging message to society and victims, which is why we advocate the dual model, so a narrow, broad and incremental approach.